From : Stephen Unwin <xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To : <xxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent : Thursday, July 15, 2004 5:08 PM
To : "George Hammond" <xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject : Re: GOD=G_uv your reply of 7/11
NOTE: Posted to sci.physics.relativity as:
GOD=G_uv UNWIN EXPLAINS BIRTH
George:
Oh, I thought Guv was in literal spacetime. I guess then that in the
perceptual space, a new born baby would be the analogy of a singularity
(big bang rather than a black hole). Very interesting.
Steve
NOTE: Stephen Unwin PhD (physics-quantum gravity) is author of
_The Probability of God_ (Crown Forum, 2003) in which he
uses Bayesian probability theory to calculate that the
probability is P=67% that God exists.
A 1 page review of this book by Michael Shermer appears
in the current (July) issue of Scientific American on page 46.
Dear Dr. Stephen Unwin,
Your suggestion that:
".. a newborn baby would be the analog of a singularity
(big bang rather than a black hole)."
has solved a problem that I have been struggling with for a year!
A year ago I posted a "toy model" gravitational field structure that
might explain the "gravitational mechanism" of birth and growth in
Psychometry Space, on sci.physics.relativity.
My first take was that it could be modeled as birth at the
Schwarzchild radius of a Black Hole which would give the infinite
time dilation and infinite length contraction of birth (conception)...
and then growth would be explained as moving away from the black
hole to larger radii (lower gravity) using the Schwarzchild metric:
ds^2 = dr^2/(1-2M/r) - dt^2(1-2M/r)
We know that a 9 year old child (a 50% grown person) has a
time dilation = 50% (mental speed:intelligence = 50%)
space contraction = 50% (physical body size deficit = 50%)
which would correspond to r=2.67M
Then, at adulthood we assume a "growth deficit" of about 15%
which is near the actual population average, and this gives:
r = 7M
which means the entire human population is living in a "virtual
gravitational field" equivalent to that at a distance r=7M
from a black hole.
TURNS OUT THAT WHILE THIS MODEL GIVES
THE CORRECT TIME AND SPACE DILATIONS,
IT CAN'T BE CORRECT, SINCE G_uv=0 outside a
black hole (i.e. G_uv=0 identically in empty space).
I immediately realized that an "empty space" model will not
provide the analog to:
GOD=G_uv=T_uv=BGD (=B rain G rowth D eficit)
in Psychometry space because the brain growth deficit
is NEVER ZERO in the human population.
THEREFORE THE CORRECT GRAVITY MODEL
MUST HAVE a T_uv that is:
1. A continuous mass density distribution filling all space.
2. A time varying mass density which starts at infinity and
proceeds towards zero as a function of time, everywhere.
3. Some "mysterious mechanism" must be used to explain the
"disappearance of mass" in this real space (which is the
analog to the disappearance of the braingrowth deficit
during normal childhood growth, in Psychometry Space).
I've been wracking my brain for a year trying to come up with such
a model... but nothing known to man seemed to fill the bill.
How would one credibly explain "the mysterious reduction in
mass density" for one thing?
THEN I RECEIVED YOUR EMAIL
and you suggested that it might be a "big bang rather than a
black hole"... and I nearly fell off my chair!!
A BIG BANG HAS EXACTLY THE 3-CHARACTERISTICS
LISTED ABOVE!!
The mysterious "disappearance of mass" is explained by the
"Hubble expansion of space" which simply dilutes the mass
and causes the mass density to decrease towards zero!!
So therefore, YES, birth and growth in Psychometry space which
is controlled by the equation GOD=G_uv IS apparently correctly
modeled as a classical gravity BIG BANG expansion.
1. Life begins with "infinite curvature", GOD=G_uv=infinity
at birth (conception), thus birth is a "big bang".
2. Childhood growth represents a
Hubble expansion of "perceptual reality"
where G_uv continually decreases.
3. In a perfect world G_uv would reach Zero at age 18 and
our "perceptual universe" would be infinitely large
flat space. However, the Secular Trend in Growth shows
that there is a "terminal growth deficit" in all adults,
therefore G_uv never reaches Zero for any of us. This
explains why there is a "God" and what it is... it's the
"terminal adult curvature of perceptual reality".
Now, here's something you might help me with:
According to both Einstein (1922) and modern research
(Hartle, _Gravitation_ page 384, Robertson-Walker metrics),
the simplest relation between G_uv and the "size of the
universe" is given by:
G_uv = 1/a^2 (a=radius of the universe)
for a universe with constant curvature, G_uv.
or putting it the other way:
a^2 = 1/G_uv (a=radius of the Universe)
Looking now at G_uv in Psychometry Space, we see that this
equation tells us that somehow our "perceptual world"
begins with zero-size and then as we grow up it "expands"
in a big bang expansion according to the equation:
a^2 = 1/G_uv = 1/BGD (BGD = braingrowth deficit)
actually more accurately we have in the nonlinear
region of very large BGD:
1
a^2 = 1/G_uv = ---------------- (see note 3 my Noetic J. paper,)
BGD/(1-BGD) online copy on my website
or:
1-BGD
a^2 = ------- (which reduces to 1/BGD for small BGD)
BGD i.e. for adults
At birth BGD=1 (big bang) and a=0
At adulthood BGD=.15 and a=2.38
In a perfect world BGD=0 at adulthood, so that a=infinity.
So yes, the "big bang model" DOES provide an analog to
birth and growth in Psychometry Space.
Now.. here's something that you may be able to help me with.
What I'm wondering is how this would explain an "event horizon"
.... I mean the difference between 2.38 and infinity must
represent some kind of an "event horizon" separating Heaven
and Earth.... the phrase "visible universe" in cosmology
must translate over to "visible reality" in perceptual space
......I'm still working on this.
What I mean by the "event horizon" in perceptual reality is
this for example... to a hi-growth person like you Brenda Lee
probably looks like a vaudeville mime, while to a lo-growth
person like myself she looks like a princess. This is
because her event horizon is larger than mine but smaller
than yours.. so she can croon me to sleep with her
flawless falsetto while she probably looks and sounds
like a flagrant imposter to you. The size of this event
horizon is what separates the men from the boys IOW, and
explains the historical drama of God. I would be afraid
of Adolf Hitler for instance, but to F.D.R. he probably
looked like the butler... All due to the tremendous
differences in our individual growth deficits!
Incidentally, as we know G_uv is not defined for infinite
mass density, Einstein's equation breaks down at the big Bang
and it is believed that "Quantum Gravity" must be used to
explain the Big Bang.
This means that "birth" (conception) or the beginning
of human life must actually be a Quantum Gravity process
of some kind. Interestingly, this probably tells us that
likewise Death is probably a Quantum Gravity process of
some kind also. This opens onto speculations of quantum
gravitational mechanisms for the (very speculative) theory of
Life After Death...?
Well there it is Steve. Your shoot from the hip suggestion
turns out to be correct and represents a fundamental advance
in the scientific theory of God.
Apparently the phrase "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" has
taken on a greater perspective. The birth of a human being
is apparently a recapitulation of the entire Big Bang origin
of the Universe itself! It is less of a wonder then that
human beings seem to have a built in "mirror image" of the
whole of reality within them. Apparently that's what a
human being is... a recapitulation of the whole Universe!
Anyway, between this and the _Probability of God = 67%_
you have now hit two home runs in two times at bat in this
ball game. If you have any more ideas about this scientific
proof of God..
PLEASE EMAIL ME IMMEDIATELY!
My best regards, George Hammond, M.S. Physics (1967)
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
====================================
.
|
